Originally posted June 24, 2009. Reposted September 6, 2010
There’s a debate going in the church world right now about “Attractional” ministry and “Missional” ministry. The debate is nothing new, but here’s my attempt at simplifying and understanding the debate (some of you may think I’m over-simplifying).
“Attractional” reflects the mindset that capitalizes on the “draw” of great weekend services and church programs. “If our ministry is cutting edge, quality, and inspiring, people will come to church and be led to Christ.”
“Missional” reflects the mindset that capitalizes on the “draw” of the church being active in the community and serving those in need. “If we are the hands and feet of Jesus in our community people will be drawn to Christ.”
For reasons that escape me people are choosing sides and debating the merits of both positions as if one were better than the other. Personally I think the whole debate is kinda nuts.
If we’re honest we’ll recognize that both models reach a certain part of the population, so why not be both? Why not have amazing ministries and programs while at the same time having an aggressive outward focus by serving the community?
To me it’s simple: the focus of the church should always include outwardly focused small groups (missional) and excellent, culturally-relevant weekend services (attractional).
Two things:
1. If your church has neither great programmes nor great community activity – which do you tackle first?
2. If (like the large majority of churches) you have limited resources and can only make one side great, do you put resources into attractional but not missional, missional but not attractional, or do you just aim for a better class of mediocrity on both?
There’s why the debate is happening – in a nutshell.
James: I think you should start with missional. It takes far less in the way of resources.
We need to get past the tyranny of the “or” and embrace the genius of the “and.” Both Attractional and Missional have value, although the early church was primarily missional in its structure, the love that the disciples had for one another was “attractional.”
To revisit my answer to James then: Start with teaching your flock to love each other and then take that love into each member’s world. It reminds me of the horizontal spokes on The Navigator Wheel:
http://www.navigators.org/us/resources/illustrations/items/the_wheel
My experience as someone from outside the church world, meaning I am not full time vocational ministry, is that church people focus on what can WE do to bring people in or what can WE do to server our community.
The Holy Spirit is both attractional and missional. People are drawn not to cool services, but to life changing truth that is from the Holy Spirit. Communities are not changed from people’s good works, but from the true life changing love of Christ.
We are all called by Christ to go and make disciples by being witnesses to what we know is true. We don’t have to make it cool or prove anything through works. We just have to speak the truth, attractional and be who Christ made us to be, people of Love, missional.
Very well said Ryan! I also agree with you, Charles. Missional is not expensive if it is our lifestyle. It’s not about having giant block parties, but about loving people and sharing God’s truth with them.